FOOTNOTES:

FOOTNOTES:[1]Mr W. H. St John Hope arrived independently at similar conclusions.[2]In the paper on Earthworks in the second volume of theVictoria County History of Yorkshire, this subdivision of the promiscuous class X., is used.[3]Since the above was written, Mr Hadrian Allcroft’s work onEarthwork of Englandhas furnished an admirable text-book of this subject.[4]SeeFrontispiece.[5]SeeFig. 1.[6]For instance, at Berkeley, Ewias Harold, Yelden, and Tomen y Roddwy.[7]As at Rayleigh and Downpatrick.[8]In some of these castles there is no gap in the bailey banks for an entrance. They must have been entered by a movable wooden stair, such as horses can be taught to climb. See the plan of Topcliffe Castle, Yorks (Fig. 1).[9]Vor Oldtid, p. 629.[10]Entwickelung des Kriegswesens, iii., 379.[11]SeeChapter VII.[12]Primitive Folkmoots.SeeAppendix A.[13]Early Fortifications in Scotland, p. 13. He adds an instance showing that Moot Hill is sometimes a mistake for Moot Hall.[14]Scottish Review, vol. xxxii.[15]Some writers give the name of moot-hill to places in Yorkshire and elsewhere where the older ordnance maps give moat-hill.Moatin this connection is the same asmotte, the Scotch and Irishmote, i.e., the hillock of a castle, derived from the Norman-French wordmotte. As this word is by far the most convenient name to give to these hillocks, being the only specific name which they have ever had, we shall henceforth use it in these pages. We prefer it tomote, which is the Anglicised form of the word, because of its confusion withmoat, a ditch. Some writers advocate the wordmount, but this appears to us too vague. As the wordmotteis French in origin, it appropriately describes a thing which was very un-English when first introduced here.[16]At York, a prehistoric crouching skeleton was found by Messrs Benson and Platnauer when excavating the castle hill in 1903, 4 feet 6 inches below the level of the ground. The motte at York appears to have been raised after the destruction of the first castle, but whether the first hillock belonged to the ancient burial is not decided by the account, “Notes on Clifford’s Tower,” by the above authors.Trans. York. Philosoph. Soc., 1902. Another instance is recorded in theRevue Archæologique, to which we have unfortunately lost the reference.[17]From the report of a competent witness, Mr Basil Stallybrass.[18]Earle,Two Saxon Chronicles Parallel, Introd., xxiii.[19]Nennius says that Ida “unxit(read cinxit) Dynguayrdi Guerth-Berneich”=a strength or fort of Bernicia.Mon. Hist. Brit., 75. Elsewhere he calls Bamborough Dinguo Aroy. It is quite possible that there might have been a Kelticdinin a place so well fitted for one as Bamborough.[20]Bede, H. E., iii., 16.[21]See Bede, as above, and Symeon, ii., 45 (R.S.).[22]We infer this from the strong defences of what is now the middle ward.[23]The fact, however, that theTrinoda Necessitas, the duty of landholders to contribute to the repair of boroughs and bridges, and to serve in the fyrd, is occasionally mentioned in charters earlier than the Danish wars, shows that there were town walls to be kept up even at that date. See Baldwin Brown,The Arts in Early England, i., 82.[24]See Wright,History of Domestic Manners, p. 13.[25]The Danish fortress of Nottingham is mentioned by theChroniclein 868, but we are speaking now of purely Anglo-Saxon fortresses.[26]Asser, ch. 91, Stevenson’s edition.[27]“That same year King Alfred repaired London; and all the English submitted to him, except those who were under the bondage of the Danish men; and then he committed the city (burh) to the keeping of Ethelred the ealdorman.”A.-S. C., 886. The word used for London isLondonburh. Asser says: “Londoniam civitatem honorifice restauravit et habitabilem fecit,” p. 489.[28]Birch’sCartularium, ii., 220, 221.[29]Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, 878, 893, 896. According to Henry of Huntingdon, the work on the Lea was the splitting of that river into two channels; but I am informed that no trace of such a division remains.[30]Gesta Pontificum, 186. SeeAppendix C.[31]Birch’sCartularium, ii., 222; Kemble’sCodex Diplomaticus, v., 142.[32]He signs a charter in 889 as “subregulus et patricius Merciorum,” Kemble’sCodex Diplomaticus. See Freeman,N. C., i., 564; and Plummer,A.-S. C., i., 118.[33]The dates in this chapter are taken from Florence of Worcester, who is generally believed to have used a more correct copy of theAnglo-Saxon Chroniclethan those which have come down to us.[34]SeeAppendix B.[35]A.-S. C., 910, 911.[36]New English Dictionary, Borough.[37]Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, 942. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle has three words for fortifications,burh,faesten, andgeweorc. Burh is always used for those of Edward and Ethelfleda, faesten (fastness) or geweorc (work) for those of the Danes.[38]See the illustrations in Wright,History of Domestic Manners.[39]Buryis formed frombyrig, the dative ofburh.[40]Professor Maitland observed: “To say nothing of hamlets, we have full 250 parishes whose names end in burgh, bury, or borough, and in many cases we see no sign in them of an ancient camp or of an exceptionally dense population.”Domesday Book and Beyond, 184.[41]Schmid,Gesetze der Angelsachsen, pp. 176, 214, 372. It is not absolutely certain that theburhin these three cases does not mean a town.[42]Schmid, 138. Professor Maitland says: “In Athelstan’s day it seems to be supposed by the legislator that amootwill usually be held in aburh. If a man neglect three summonses to a moot, the oldest men of theburhare to ride to his place and seize his goods.”Domesday Book and Beyond, 185. “All my reeves,” are mentioned in the Preface toAthelstan’s Laws, Schmid, 126.[43]Schmid, 138. “Butan porte” is the Saxon expression,portbeing another word for town; see Schmid, 643.[44]Schmid, Edgar III., 5; Ethelred II., 6.[45]Edgar IV., 2.[46]The writer was first led to doubt the correctness of the late Mr G. T. Clark’s theory of burhs by examining the A.-S. illustrated MSS. in the British Museum. On p. 29 of the MS. ofPrudentius(Cleopatra, c. viii.), there is an excellent drawing of a four-sided enclosure, with towers at the angles, and battlemented walls of masonry. The title of the picture is “Virtutes urbem ingrediuntur,” andurbemis rendered in the A.-S. gloss asburh. SeeFig. 2.[47]Florence translatesburhasurbsnineteen times, asarxfour times, asmurumonce, asmunitioonce, ascivitasonce.[48]Published in 1884, but comprising a number of papers read to various archæological societies through many previous years, during which Mr Clark’s reputation as an archæologist appears to have been made.[49]“Eallum thæm folc to gebeorge.” Birch’sCartularium, ii., 222.[50]Professor Maitland has claimed that the origin of the boroughs was largely military, the duty of maintaining the walls of the county borough being incumbent on the magnates of the shire.Domesday Book and Beyond, 189. SeeAppendix C.[51]Parker’sDomestic Architecture in England from Richard II. to Henry VIII., part ii., 256.[52]A.-S. C., 1048.[53]William of Jumièges, vii.-xvii.[54]A.-S. C.(Peterborough), 1048.[55]A.-S. C., 1052 (Worcester). This castle is generally supposed to be Richard’s Castle, Herefordshire, built by Richard Scrob; but I see no reason why it should not be Hereford, as the Norman Ralph, King Edward’s nephew, was Earl of Hereford. We shall return to these castles later.[56]Mr Freeman says: “In the eleventh century, the wordcastelwas introduced into our language to mark something which was evidently quite distinct from the familiarburhof ancient times.... Ordericus speaks of the thing and its name as something distinctly French: “munitiones quas Galli castella nuncupant.” The castles which were now introduced into England seem to have been new inventions in Normandy itself. William of Jumièges distinctly makes the building of castles to have been one of the main signs and causes of the general disorder of the days of William’s minority, and he seems to speak of the practice as something new.”N. C., ii., 606. It is surprising that after so clear a statement as this, Mr Freeman should have fallen under the influence of Mr Clark’sburhtheory, and should completely have confused castles and boroughs.[57]Codex Diplomaticus, i., 138.[58]History of Rochester, 1772, p. 21.[59]Stevenson’s edition ofAsser, 331. SeeAppendix D.[60]Asser, c. xlix.[61]Worcester, Chester, Tamworth, Stafford, Warwick, Hertford, Buckingham, Bedford, Maldon, Huntingdon, Colchester, Stamford, and Nottingham.[62]Domesday Book and Beyond, 216.[63]Buckingham is the only place which is included in both lists. SeeAppendix E.[64]Domesday Book and Beyond, 188. SeeAppendix E. Southwark, one of the names, which is not called a borough in Domesday, retains its name ofThe Boroughto the present day.[65]No Roman remains have been found in either place.[66]Beauties of England and Wales, Oxfordshire.[67]See Skeat’sDictionary, “Timber.”[68]Excavation has recently shown that many of the great hill-forts were permanently inhabited, and it is now considered improbable that they were originally built as camps of refuge. It seems more likely that this use, of which there are undoubted instances in historic times (see Cæsar,Bello Gallico, vi., 10, and v., 21), belonged to a more advanced stage of development, when population had moved down into the lower and cultivatable lands, but still used their old forts in cases of emergency.[69]Ante,p. 21.[70]Haverfield, in V. C. H. Worcester,Romano-British Worcester, i.[71]Early Fortifications in Scotland, p. 105.[72]Gairdner and Mullinger,Introduction to the Study of English History, 268.[73]The tower called Cæsar’s Tower is really a mural tower of the 13th century. E. W. Cox, “Chester Castle,” inChester Hist. and Archæol. Soc., v., 239.[74]Cox, as above. See also Shrubsole, “The Age of the City Walls of Chester,”Arch. Journ., xliv., 1887. The present wall, which includes the castle, is an extension probably not earlier than James I.’s reign.[75]The charter is given in Ormerod’sHistory of Cheshire, ii., 405.[76]Journ. of Brit. Arch. Ass., 1875, p. 153.[77]Itin., ii., 2.[78]“Arcem quam in occidentali Sabrinæ fluminis plaga, in loco qui Bricge dicitur lingua Saxonica, Ægelfleda Merciorum domina quondam construxerat, fratre suo Edwardo seniore regnante, Comes Rodbertus contra regem Henricum, muro lato et alto, summoque restaurare cœpit.” 1101.[79]A good deal has been made of the name Oldbury, as pointing to theold burh; but Oldbury is the name of the manor, not of the hillock, which bears the singular name of Pampudding Hill. Tradition says that the Parliamentary forces used it for their guns in 1646. Eyton’sShropshire, i., 132.[80]“Bricge cum exercitu pene totius Angliæ obsedit, machinas quoque ibi construere et castellum firmare præcepit.”Florence, 1102.[81]Florence in fact saysurbem restauravit.[82]D. B., i., 246.[83]These buildings formed part of a hunting lodge built in the reign of Edward III., called The Chamber in the Forest. See Ormerod’sCheshire, ii., 3. When visiting Eddisbury several years ago, the writer noticed several Perpendicular buttresses in these ruins.[84]D. B., i., 238a, 1.[85]“Abbas de Couentreu habet 36 masuras, et 4 sunt wastæ propter situm castelli.... Hae masurae pertinent ad terras quas ipsi barones tenent extra burgum, et ibi appreciatae sunt.” D. B., i., 238.[86]Domesday Book and Beyond, p. 189. SeeAppendix D.[87]Dugdale’sWarwickshire, 1st edition, pp. 50 and 75. The derivation of Kirby from Cyricbyrig is not according to etymological rules, but there can be no doubt about it as a fact; for in Domesday it is stated thatChircheberiewas held by Geoffrey de Wirche, and that the monks of St Nicholas [at Angers] had two carucates in the manor. In the charter in which Geoffrey de Wirche makes this gift Chircheberie is called Kirkeberia [M. A., vi., 996], but in the subsequent charter of Roger de Mowbray, confirming the gift, it is called Kirkeby.[88]Britannia, ii., 375.[89]Numismatic Chronicle, 3rd S., xiii., 220.[90]Fowler’sHistory of Runcorngives a plan of this fort, and there is another in Hanshall’sHistory of Cheshire, p. 418 (1817). A very different one is given in Beaumont’sHistory of Halton.[91]Beaumont’sRecords of the Honour of Halton. In 1368, John Hank received the surrender of a house near to the castle in Runcorn.[92]Mediæval Military Architecture, ii., 120.[93]Essex Naturalist, January 1887.[94]Danbury Camp, which has also been surveyed by Mr Spurrell (Essex Naturalist, 1890), is precisely similar in plan to Witham, but nothing is known of its history.[95]SeeVictoria History of Bedfordshire, i., 281.[96]Morant’sHistory of Essex, i. Three sides of the rampart were visible in his time.[97]D. B., ii., 5.[98]Itin., i., 12.[99]Baker’sHistory of Northampton, ii., 321.[100]D. B., i., 219b.[101]A.-S. C., 921. “Wrohte tha burg æt Tofeceastre mid stan wealle.” Florence says 918.[102]Baker,History of Northants, ii., 318. See also Haverfield,V. C. H., Northants, i., 184.[103]Atkinson’sCambridge Described, p. 1.[104]There is, however, this difficulty, that Cambridge was still occupied by a Danish force when Wigingamere was built. It submitted to Edward in 918.[105]See Mr Plummer’s discussion of these variations in his edition of theChronicle, ii., 116.[106]Lewis,Topographical Dictionary of England. Mr Rye remarks:—“The silting up of the harbour has ruined a port which once promised to be of as great importance as Norwich.”History of Norfolk, p. 228.[107]It is really wonderful that the identification of Cledemuthan with the mouth of the Cleddy in Pembrokeshire could ever have been accepted by any sober historian. That Edward, whose whole time was fully occupied with his conquests from the Danish settlers, could have suddenly transported his forces into one of the remotest corners of Wales, would have been a feat worthy of the coming days of air-ships. William of Worcester has preserved a tradition that Edward repaired Burgh, “quae olim Saxonice dicebatur Burgh-chester,” but he confuses it with Norwich.Itinerarium, 337. Is it possible that we ought to look for Cledemuthan at Burgh Castle, at the mouth of the Waveney? It would be quite in accordance with Edward’s actions elsewhere to restore an old Romancastrum.[108]Leland says: “There were 7 principall Towers or Wards in the waulles of Staunford, to eche of which were certeyne freeholders in the Towne allottid to wache and ward in tyme of neadde.”Itinerarium, vii., 11.[109]A.-S. C., 868.[110]Shipman’sOld Town Wall of Nottingham, pp. 73-75. The evidence for a Roman origin of the borough is altogether too slight, as, except some doubtful earthenware bottles, no Roman remains have been found at Nottingham.[111]A.-S. C., 921.Florence of Worcester, 919.[112]I am indebted for much of the information given here to the local antiquarian knowledge of Mr Harold Sands, F.S.A. He states that the old borough was 1400 yards from the Trent at its nearest point, and that the highest ground on the south side of the Trent is marked by the Trent Bridge cricket ground, the last spot to become flooded. Here, therefore, was the probable site of Edward’s second borough.[113]SeeAppendix F.[114]Whitaker’sHistory of Manchester, i., 43.[115]Trans. of Lanc. and Chesh. Hist. and Ant. Soc., v., 246.[116]“Castle” in combination with some other word is often given to works of Roman or British origin, because its original meaning was a fortified enclosure; but the name Castle Hill is extremely common for mottes.[117]We may remark here that it is not surprising that there should be a number of motte castles which are never mentioned in history, especially as it is certain that all the “adulterine” castles, which were raised without royal permission in the rebellions of Stephen’s and other reigns, were very short-lived.[118]Mediæval Military Architecture, i., 18. See Mr Round’s remarks on Mr Clark’s vagueness in his “Castles of the Conquest,”Archæologia, 1902.[119]TheA.-S. C.speaks of this Danish host as “a great heathen army.” 866.[120]“Worhton other fæsten ymb hie selfe.” The same language is frequently used in the continental accounts of the Danish fortresses: “Munientes se per gyrum avulsæ terræ aggere,”Dudo, 155 (Duchesne): “Se ex illis (sepibus et parietibus)circumdandomunierant.”It., p. 81.[121]The earthworks at Bayford Court must belong to the mediæval castle which existed there. SeeBeauties of England and Wales, Kent, p. 698. Castle Rough is less than an acre in area.[122]Mr Harold Sands,Some Kentish Castles, p. 10.[123]See the plan inVictoria History of Kent, paper on Earthworks by the late Mr I. C. Gould. Hasted states that there was a small circular mount there as well as an embankment, and that there are other remains in the marsh below, which seem to have been connected with the former by a narrow ridge or causeway,Kent, iii., 117. The causeway led to a similar mount in the marsh below, but Mr Gould inclined to think the mounts and causeway later, and possibly part of a dam for “inning” the marsh.V. C. H., p. 397.[124]“Hæsten’s Camps at Shoebury and Benfleet,”Essex Naturalist, iv., 153.[125]TheChroniclesays that the ships of Hæsten were either broken to pieces, or burnt, or taken to London or Rochester. 894.[126]Essex Naturalist, as above, p. 151. These berms certainly suggest Roman influence.[127]A.-S. C., 894.[128]Montgomery Collections, xxxi., 337; Dymond,On the Site of Buttington. See also Steenstrup,Normannerne, ii., 80.[129]Beauties of England and Wales, vii., 246. There is nothing left either at Great or Little Amwell now but fragments of what are supposed to be homestead moats.Royal Commission on Historical Monuments, pp. 95, 142, Herts. vol.

[1]Mr W. H. St John Hope arrived independently at similar conclusions.

[2]In the paper on Earthworks in the second volume of theVictoria County History of Yorkshire, this subdivision of the promiscuous class X., is used.

[3]Since the above was written, Mr Hadrian Allcroft’s work onEarthwork of Englandhas furnished an admirable text-book of this subject.

[4]SeeFrontispiece.

[5]SeeFig. 1.

[6]For instance, at Berkeley, Ewias Harold, Yelden, and Tomen y Roddwy.

[7]As at Rayleigh and Downpatrick.

[8]In some of these castles there is no gap in the bailey banks for an entrance. They must have been entered by a movable wooden stair, such as horses can be taught to climb. See the plan of Topcliffe Castle, Yorks (Fig. 1).

[9]Vor Oldtid, p. 629.

[10]Entwickelung des Kriegswesens, iii., 379.

[11]SeeChapter VII.

[12]Primitive Folkmoots.SeeAppendix A.

[13]Early Fortifications in Scotland, p. 13. He adds an instance showing that Moot Hill is sometimes a mistake for Moot Hall.

[14]Scottish Review, vol. xxxii.

[15]Some writers give the name of moot-hill to places in Yorkshire and elsewhere where the older ordnance maps give moat-hill.Moatin this connection is the same asmotte, the Scotch and Irishmote, i.e., the hillock of a castle, derived from the Norman-French wordmotte. As this word is by far the most convenient name to give to these hillocks, being the only specific name which they have ever had, we shall henceforth use it in these pages. We prefer it tomote, which is the Anglicised form of the word, because of its confusion withmoat, a ditch. Some writers advocate the wordmount, but this appears to us too vague. As the wordmotteis French in origin, it appropriately describes a thing which was very un-English when first introduced here.

[16]At York, a prehistoric crouching skeleton was found by Messrs Benson and Platnauer when excavating the castle hill in 1903, 4 feet 6 inches below the level of the ground. The motte at York appears to have been raised after the destruction of the first castle, but whether the first hillock belonged to the ancient burial is not decided by the account, “Notes on Clifford’s Tower,” by the above authors.Trans. York. Philosoph. Soc., 1902. Another instance is recorded in theRevue Archæologique, to which we have unfortunately lost the reference.

[17]From the report of a competent witness, Mr Basil Stallybrass.

[18]Earle,Two Saxon Chronicles Parallel, Introd., xxiii.

[19]Nennius says that Ida “unxit(read cinxit) Dynguayrdi Guerth-Berneich”=a strength or fort of Bernicia.Mon. Hist. Brit., 75. Elsewhere he calls Bamborough Dinguo Aroy. It is quite possible that there might have been a Kelticdinin a place so well fitted for one as Bamborough.

[20]Bede, H. E., iii., 16.

[21]See Bede, as above, and Symeon, ii., 45 (R.S.).

[22]We infer this from the strong defences of what is now the middle ward.

[23]The fact, however, that theTrinoda Necessitas, the duty of landholders to contribute to the repair of boroughs and bridges, and to serve in the fyrd, is occasionally mentioned in charters earlier than the Danish wars, shows that there were town walls to be kept up even at that date. See Baldwin Brown,The Arts in Early England, i., 82.

[24]See Wright,History of Domestic Manners, p. 13.

[25]The Danish fortress of Nottingham is mentioned by theChroniclein 868, but we are speaking now of purely Anglo-Saxon fortresses.

[26]Asser, ch. 91, Stevenson’s edition.

[27]“That same year King Alfred repaired London; and all the English submitted to him, except those who were under the bondage of the Danish men; and then he committed the city (burh) to the keeping of Ethelred the ealdorman.”A.-S. C., 886. The word used for London isLondonburh. Asser says: “Londoniam civitatem honorifice restauravit et habitabilem fecit,” p. 489.

[28]Birch’sCartularium, ii., 220, 221.

[29]Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, 878, 893, 896. According to Henry of Huntingdon, the work on the Lea was the splitting of that river into two channels; but I am informed that no trace of such a division remains.

[30]Gesta Pontificum, 186. SeeAppendix C.

[31]Birch’sCartularium, ii., 222; Kemble’sCodex Diplomaticus, v., 142.

[32]He signs a charter in 889 as “subregulus et patricius Merciorum,” Kemble’sCodex Diplomaticus. See Freeman,N. C., i., 564; and Plummer,A.-S. C., i., 118.

[33]The dates in this chapter are taken from Florence of Worcester, who is generally believed to have used a more correct copy of theAnglo-Saxon Chroniclethan those which have come down to us.

[34]SeeAppendix B.

[35]A.-S. C., 910, 911.

[36]New English Dictionary, Borough.

[37]Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, 942. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle has three words for fortifications,burh,faesten, andgeweorc. Burh is always used for those of Edward and Ethelfleda, faesten (fastness) or geweorc (work) for those of the Danes.

[38]See the illustrations in Wright,History of Domestic Manners.

[39]Buryis formed frombyrig, the dative ofburh.

[40]Professor Maitland observed: “To say nothing of hamlets, we have full 250 parishes whose names end in burgh, bury, or borough, and in many cases we see no sign in them of an ancient camp or of an exceptionally dense population.”Domesday Book and Beyond, 184.

[41]Schmid,Gesetze der Angelsachsen, pp. 176, 214, 372. It is not absolutely certain that theburhin these three cases does not mean a town.

[42]Schmid, 138. Professor Maitland says: “In Athelstan’s day it seems to be supposed by the legislator that amootwill usually be held in aburh. If a man neglect three summonses to a moot, the oldest men of theburhare to ride to his place and seize his goods.”Domesday Book and Beyond, 185. “All my reeves,” are mentioned in the Preface toAthelstan’s Laws, Schmid, 126.

[43]Schmid, 138. “Butan porte” is the Saxon expression,portbeing another word for town; see Schmid, 643.

[44]Schmid, Edgar III., 5; Ethelred II., 6.

[45]Edgar IV., 2.

[46]The writer was first led to doubt the correctness of the late Mr G. T. Clark’s theory of burhs by examining the A.-S. illustrated MSS. in the British Museum. On p. 29 of the MS. ofPrudentius(Cleopatra, c. viii.), there is an excellent drawing of a four-sided enclosure, with towers at the angles, and battlemented walls of masonry. The title of the picture is “Virtutes urbem ingrediuntur,” andurbemis rendered in the A.-S. gloss asburh. SeeFig. 2.

[47]Florence translatesburhasurbsnineteen times, asarxfour times, asmurumonce, asmunitioonce, ascivitasonce.

[48]Published in 1884, but comprising a number of papers read to various archæological societies through many previous years, during which Mr Clark’s reputation as an archæologist appears to have been made.

[49]“Eallum thæm folc to gebeorge.” Birch’sCartularium, ii., 222.

[50]Professor Maitland has claimed that the origin of the boroughs was largely military, the duty of maintaining the walls of the county borough being incumbent on the magnates of the shire.Domesday Book and Beyond, 189. SeeAppendix C.

[51]Parker’sDomestic Architecture in England from Richard II. to Henry VIII., part ii., 256.

[52]A.-S. C., 1048.

[53]William of Jumièges, vii.-xvii.

[54]A.-S. C.(Peterborough), 1048.

[55]A.-S. C., 1052 (Worcester). This castle is generally supposed to be Richard’s Castle, Herefordshire, built by Richard Scrob; but I see no reason why it should not be Hereford, as the Norman Ralph, King Edward’s nephew, was Earl of Hereford. We shall return to these castles later.

[56]Mr Freeman says: “In the eleventh century, the wordcastelwas introduced into our language to mark something which was evidently quite distinct from the familiarburhof ancient times.... Ordericus speaks of the thing and its name as something distinctly French: “munitiones quas Galli castella nuncupant.” The castles which were now introduced into England seem to have been new inventions in Normandy itself. William of Jumièges distinctly makes the building of castles to have been one of the main signs and causes of the general disorder of the days of William’s minority, and he seems to speak of the practice as something new.”N. C., ii., 606. It is surprising that after so clear a statement as this, Mr Freeman should have fallen under the influence of Mr Clark’sburhtheory, and should completely have confused castles and boroughs.

[57]Codex Diplomaticus, i., 138.

[58]History of Rochester, 1772, p. 21.

[59]Stevenson’s edition ofAsser, 331. SeeAppendix D.

[60]Asser, c. xlix.

[61]Worcester, Chester, Tamworth, Stafford, Warwick, Hertford, Buckingham, Bedford, Maldon, Huntingdon, Colchester, Stamford, and Nottingham.

[62]Domesday Book and Beyond, 216.

[63]Buckingham is the only place which is included in both lists. SeeAppendix E.

[64]Domesday Book and Beyond, 188. SeeAppendix E. Southwark, one of the names, which is not called a borough in Domesday, retains its name ofThe Boroughto the present day.

[65]No Roman remains have been found in either place.

[66]Beauties of England and Wales, Oxfordshire.

[67]See Skeat’sDictionary, “Timber.”

[68]Excavation has recently shown that many of the great hill-forts were permanently inhabited, and it is now considered improbable that they were originally built as camps of refuge. It seems more likely that this use, of which there are undoubted instances in historic times (see Cæsar,Bello Gallico, vi., 10, and v., 21), belonged to a more advanced stage of development, when population had moved down into the lower and cultivatable lands, but still used their old forts in cases of emergency.

[69]Ante,p. 21.

[70]Haverfield, in V. C. H. Worcester,Romano-British Worcester, i.

[71]Early Fortifications in Scotland, p. 105.

[72]Gairdner and Mullinger,Introduction to the Study of English History, 268.

[73]The tower called Cæsar’s Tower is really a mural tower of the 13th century. E. W. Cox, “Chester Castle,” inChester Hist. and Archæol. Soc., v., 239.

[74]Cox, as above. See also Shrubsole, “The Age of the City Walls of Chester,”Arch. Journ., xliv., 1887. The present wall, which includes the castle, is an extension probably not earlier than James I.’s reign.

[75]The charter is given in Ormerod’sHistory of Cheshire, ii., 405.

[76]Journ. of Brit. Arch. Ass., 1875, p. 153.

[77]Itin., ii., 2.

[78]“Arcem quam in occidentali Sabrinæ fluminis plaga, in loco qui Bricge dicitur lingua Saxonica, Ægelfleda Merciorum domina quondam construxerat, fratre suo Edwardo seniore regnante, Comes Rodbertus contra regem Henricum, muro lato et alto, summoque restaurare cœpit.” 1101.

[79]A good deal has been made of the name Oldbury, as pointing to theold burh; but Oldbury is the name of the manor, not of the hillock, which bears the singular name of Pampudding Hill. Tradition says that the Parliamentary forces used it for their guns in 1646. Eyton’sShropshire, i., 132.

[80]“Bricge cum exercitu pene totius Angliæ obsedit, machinas quoque ibi construere et castellum firmare præcepit.”Florence, 1102.

[81]Florence in fact saysurbem restauravit.

[82]D. B., i., 246.

[83]These buildings formed part of a hunting lodge built in the reign of Edward III., called The Chamber in the Forest. See Ormerod’sCheshire, ii., 3. When visiting Eddisbury several years ago, the writer noticed several Perpendicular buttresses in these ruins.

[84]D. B., i., 238a, 1.

[85]“Abbas de Couentreu habet 36 masuras, et 4 sunt wastæ propter situm castelli.... Hae masurae pertinent ad terras quas ipsi barones tenent extra burgum, et ibi appreciatae sunt.” D. B., i., 238.

[86]Domesday Book and Beyond, p. 189. SeeAppendix D.

[87]Dugdale’sWarwickshire, 1st edition, pp. 50 and 75. The derivation of Kirby from Cyricbyrig is not according to etymological rules, but there can be no doubt about it as a fact; for in Domesday it is stated thatChircheberiewas held by Geoffrey de Wirche, and that the monks of St Nicholas [at Angers] had two carucates in the manor. In the charter in which Geoffrey de Wirche makes this gift Chircheberie is called Kirkeberia [M. A., vi., 996], but in the subsequent charter of Roger de Mowbray, confirming the gift, it is called Kirkeby.

[88]Britannia, ii., 375.

[89]Numismatic Chronicle, 3rd S., xiii., 220.

[90]Fowler’sHistory of Runcorngives a plan of this fort, and there is another in Hanshall’sHistory of Cheshire, p. 418 (1817). A very different one is given in Beaumont’sHistory of Halton.

[91]Beaumont’sRecords of the Honour of Halton. In 1368, John Hank received the surrender of a house near to the castle in Runcorn.

[92]Mediæval Military Architecture, ii., 120.

[93]Essex Naturalist, January 1887.

[94]Danbury Camp, which has also been surveyed by Mr Spurrell (Essex Naturalist, 1890), is precisely similar in plan to Witham, but nothing is known of its history.

[95]SeeVictoria History of Bedfordshire, i., 281.

[96]Morant’sHistory of Essex, i. Three sides of the rampart were visible in his time.

[97]D. B., ii., 5.

[98]Itin., i., 12.

[99]Baker’sHistory of Northampton, ii., 321.

[100]D. B., i., 219b.

[101]A.-S. C., 921. “Wrohte tha burg æt Tofeceastre mid stan wealle.” Florence says 918.

[102]Baker,History of Northants, ii., 318. See also Haverfield,V. C. H., Northants, i., 184.

[103]Atkinson’sCambridge Described, p. 1.

[104]There is, however, this difficulty, that Cambridge was still occupied by a Danish force when Wigingamere was built. It submitted to Edward in 918.

[105]See Mr Plummer’s discussion of these variations in his edition of theChronicle, ii., 116.

[106]Lewis,Topographical Dictionary of England. Mr Rye remarks:—“The silting up of the harbour has ruined a port which once promised to be of as great importance as Norwich.”History of Norfolk, p. 228.

[107]It is really wonderful that the identification of Cledemuthan with the mouth of the Cleddy in Pembrokeshire could ever have been accepted by any sober historian. That Edward, whose whole time was fully occupied with his conquests from the Danish settlers, could have suddenly transported his forces into one of the remotest corners of Wales, would have been a feat worthy of the coming days of air-ships. William of Worcester has preserved a tradition that Edward repaired Burgh, “quae olim Saxonice dicebatur Burgh-chester,” but he confuses it with Norwich.Itinerarium, 337. Is it possible that we ought to look for Cledemuthan at Burgh Castle, at the mouth of the Waveney? It would be quite in accordance with Edward’s actions elsewhere to restore an old Romancastrum.

[108]Leland says: “There were 7 principall Towers or Wards in the waulles of Staunford, to eche of which were certeyne freeholders in the Towne allottid to wache and ward in tyme of neadde.”Itinerarium, vii., 11.

[109]A.-S. C., 868.

[110]Shipman’sOld Town Wall of Nottingham, pp. 73-75. The evidence for a Roman origin of the borough is altogether too slight, as, except some doubtful earthenware bottles, no Roman remains have been found at Nottingham.

[111]A.-S. C., 921.Florence of Worcester, 919.

[112]I am indebted for much of the information given here to the local antiquarian knowledge of Mr Harold Sands, F.S.A. He states that the old borough was 1400 yards from the Trent at its nearest point, and that the highest ground on the south side of the Trent is marked by the Trent Bridge cricket ground, the last spot to become flooded. Here, therefore, was the probable site of Edward’s second borough.

[113]SeeAppendix F.

[114]Whitaker’sHistory of Manchester, i., 43.

[115]Trans. of Lanc. and Chesh. Hist. and Ant. Soc., v., 246.

[116]“Castle” in combination with some other word is often given to works of Roman or British origin, because its original meaning was a fortified enclosure; but the name Castle Hill is extremely common for mottes.

[117]We may remark here that it is not surprising that there should be a number of motte castles which are never mentioned in history, especially as it is certain that all the “adulterine” castles, which were raised without royal permission in the rebellions of Stephen’s and other reigns, were very short-lived.

[118]Mediæval Military Architecture, i., 18. See Mr Round’s remarks on Mr Clark’s vagueness in his “Castles of the Conquest,”Archæologia, 1902.

[119]TheA.-S. C.speaks of this Danish host as “a great heathen army.” 866.

[120]“Worhton other fæsten ymb hie selfe.” The same language is frequently used in the continental accounts of the Danish fortresses: “Munientes se per gyrum avulsæ terræ aggere,”Dudo, 155 (Duchesne): “Se ex illis (sepibus et parietibus)circumdandomunierant.”It., p. 81.

[121]The earthworks at Bayford Court must belong to the mediæval castle which existed there. SeeBeauties of England and Wales, Kent, p. 698. Castle Rough is less than an acre in area.

[122]Mr Harold Sands,Some Kentish Castles, p. 10.

[123]See the plan inVictoria History of Kent, paper on Earthworks by the late Mr I. C. Gould. Hasted states that there was a small circular mount there as well as an embankment, and that there are other remains in the marsh below, which seem to have been connected with the former by a narrow ridge or causeway,Kent, iii., 117. The causeway led to a similar mount in the marsh below, but Mr Gould inclined to think the mounts and causeway later, and possibly part of a dam for “inning” the marsh.V. C. H., p. 397.

[124]“Hæsten’s Camps at Shoebury and Benfleet,”Essex Naturalist, iv., 153.

[125]TheChroniclesays that the ships of Hæsten were either broken to pieces, or burnt, or taken to London or Rochester. 894.

[126]Essex Naturalist, as above, p. 151. These berms certainly suggest Roman influence.

[127]A.-S. C., 894.

[128]Montgomery Collections, xxxi., 337; Dymond,On the Site of Buttington. See also Steenstrup,Normannerne, ii., 80.

[129]Beauties of England and Wales, vii., 246. There is nothing left either at Great or Little Amwell now but fragments of what are supposed to be homestead moats.Royal Commission on Historical Monuments, pp. 95, 142, Herts. vol.

Back to Index Next